
. S 



LIBRARY OF CONGRESS 




p6RnuliP6» 
pHS^ 



T II K Kh\ (lU 1 U).\ or 1m;() 



Speech clcUvmtl by JWv. ^icklcii, of ^m \(ovh, 



I i < » I S I-: ( I I • i; K I • n K S K N 'I' A T I \ K S . 

JAJVUAli\ lUUi, IMUI. 



THE HEPTTBIilC IS Z'L^EFEItlSII.A.BIjE. 



"; SPEECH 



HON. DANIEL E. SICKLES, 

OF NEW YORK, 

THE STATE OF THE UNION, 

DELIVEKED IN 

THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, JANUARY IG. 1861 



The House being in the Committee of the Whole on the State of the Union — 

Mr. SICKLES said: 

Mr. Chairman : It is impossible to survey the state of things which now 
exists in this country, without being impressed l)y the remarkable parallel dis- 
closed between the present relations of the North and South and the relations 
which existed between the mother country and the colonies prior to the com- 
mencement of the revolutionary war. I think, .sir, that it is not too much to say 
that perhaps there is now more alienation of feeling, and more political antagon- 
ism between the difforent sections of this Confederacy, than prevailed between 
the mother country and the colonies in 1774. "We all know that the war of the 
Revolution was not fought so much to escape actual oppression as for a principle ; 
not so much to remove material grievances that we suffered as for general rights 
which wo asserted. 

There is now very much of this same sort of conflict upon abstract questions. 
But it is nevertheless true that millions of the population of this country, with 
an unanimity never before witnessed in our history, protest against what they 
declare to be substantial grievances ; among those thoy include the deprivation of 
essential rights in the Territories, the insecurity of their property, the disturljancc 
of their domestic tranquillity, — spoliations countenanced by their associates in 
the Confederacy, and insurrections among their slaves openly promoted in pulpits 
and presses ia the free States I Several of the southern States are endeavoring to 



2 

escape these consequences by measures wliicli, whetlier justly or wrongfully ini- 
tiated, beyond all doubt menace the dismeml^ermeut of this Confederacy, the 
organization of one or more new governments within our present limits, and pos- 
sibly some change in the political control of this continent. 

When the controversy began between England and the colonies, George III and 
the Ministry inclined to measures of the most vigorous coercion. Another great 
and gallant party, led by Chatham and Burke, and counseled by our own Frank- 
lin, proposed conciliation and the recognition of the principles, abstract though 
they might have been, which were asserted by the colonies. The advocates of 
conciliation were overborne, and the partizans of force controlled Parliament. 
Its policy was pursued to the end, with what results history has recorded; 
and in its perfect vindication of Burke and Chatliam and Franklin, history com- 
mends to us, in this hour of trial, an impressive and apposite example. It is for 
us to decide whether we will reject the counsel which this experience has devel- 
oped to us, or whether we will instead, imitate the policy of George III and 
Lord North, which proved so fatal to the aml)ition of England. 

The great fact which constitutes the crisis, is, that eight millions of our popula- 
tion are pervaded with the conviction of danger at home, of insecurity at their 
firesides, of assaults made and menaced upon their property; the refusal of their 
equal rights in the common Territories of the Union, acquired by the valor and 
treasure of the whole nation. No matter, sir, for the purposes of the present 
exigency, whether the grounds upon which this discontent is based, are entirely 
well founded or not. That was well and wisely discussed last year. We have 
now to deal with this extensive disaffection as a gigantic flict in our history and 
position. 

I do not propose to-day to consider in detail the causes of this state of things; 
yet it may not be improper to advert to them in a general way. This revolution 
began in November, 18(50. It was initiated by a change in the principles of the 
Government. In the election of Mr. Lincoln upon the doctrines avowed in the 
Chicago platform, a majority of the people asserted the right and the power to 
legislate in conflict with the fundaiucntal law of the land, as embodied in the 
Constitution and declared by the Supreme Court of the United States. The 
assertion of that power, and placing the Government in the hands of an Execu- 
tive pledged to exercise it, was of itself a civil revolution, in the character and 
form and essence of the Government. So much of the revolution was accom- 
plished in November. I.et it be well understood that a revolution in a popular 
Government can be as well achieved through the ballot-box as by the bayonet. 



The determination of a niojorify of tlu- jicnjilc to <»vi'nidc wi'Il-ascert^iiiud mnl 
essential constitutional rights is revolution in its most p<itontial aspect.. 

The States of tlu- Conlt'doracy wi-ru llierohy separated into two sections — one 
dominant and the otliir subject. Tlu- North appropriated to itself the exclusive 
right of settlement in the Territories, which an- tlic cnminon property of all the 
States. This exclusion of the slavcholdi-rs of the South from i'(|Ual participation 
in the ri«;ht of emi^'ration and colonization witli their property, is predicated upon 
the avowed uround that to hoiil .slaves is a >-\n which places a citizen under the 
ban of the Federal (Jovernment ; that this description of jjroperty is not entitled 
to protection beyond the limit.s of the State in which it may be held ; and that 
the institution itself, thou^'h coeval with American civilization, and of unknown 
anticjuity, is a r.lic of barbarism ; to tin- extinction of wliich the power and influ- 
ence of the Federal Government became pledired in the election of Mr. Ijincoln. 

The (Jovernment of the Tnited States has become I'uritan and prescriptive; 
it has ceased to be catholic and tolerant, as it was iormed. and has continued 
from the administration of \Va>liini.'ton down to the election of Lincoln. The 
vital element of our i)olitical system has ever been the e<)uality of the States; 
and from this follows the con.'^eijuent duty of non-interference with their local 
institutions, and the ei|ual right of every citizen in the (iovernment and its 
Territories. The essential characteristic of I'uritanism is the employment of 
the powers of (iovernment to coniixd a unii'orm recognition of the opinions of 
the majority, in all things. The Constitution of the Tnited States imposes no 
test upon the institutions of a State or Territory, except that rliey shall be repult 
lieaii. It was designed for a Confederation, embracing every element of civiliza- 
tion, which cimld be developed under republican institutions. The triumph of 
the Puritan element of the North, involves the probable destruction of the feder- 
ative i)rirKiple of the (Constitution, ami the consolidation of the (Government 
under the absolute power ot" a majority, which is one of the forms of despotism. 

Such is the character of the revolution begun in November. It was peaceful 
in form, T concede, but none the less comprehensive and radical. We are now 
in the presence of the second pha."<e of the revolution, which is the secession of 
several of the States of the Confederacy. Secession, also, wa.s avowed as a peace- 
ful remedy. It was intended as a remedy by means of which the aggrieved States 
could, without conflict, escape the conse>iuenees of the revolution already in pro- 
gress, and after they had lost the means of protecting them,selvcs within the Gov- 
ernment. I do not propose, sir, to diseu.ss the question of the right of secession. 
It is too late for that. The reserved rights of the States is familiar Xew York 



doctrine. They were more insisted upon, perhaps, in our convention which rati- 
fied the Constitution, because, of all the States, New York was the most reluctant 
to yield its assent to the Union. Even in the colonial times, long before the 
Revolution, we had occasion to consider this question in our controversy with 
Vermont, where the right of a community to form an independent government 
was successfully asserted, after a long struggle, in which Ethan Allen won as 
much distinction as he afterwards gained at Ticonderoga.* 

I might, in passing, compare the remedy of secession with various constitu- 
tional remedies which are unquestioned, and which, perhaps, would be more 

I. 

effectual for the redress of grievances. Take, for instance, sir, the remedy of 
refusing supplies to the Government. Ever since the seventeenth century this 
has been recognized as a constitutional proceeding. It has been occasionally and 
successfully employed in English history to compel modifications of the British 
Constitution. It was employed to ameliorate the monarchical and aristocratical 
elements of the Government and to secure larger powers to the people. Suppose 
it were applied here ; suppose there was a sufficient representation in both Houses 
to make it effectual; suppose the Representatives from the southern States alone, 
without including their friends among the northern Representatives, had deter- 
mined, in a body, to resort to every parliamentary resource to cut off supplies 
from the Federal Government. Without supplies we all know that the Federal 
Government would crumble to dust in a year; it would be paralyzed from head 
to foot ; it would be compelled to yield to any assailant. That remedy was not 
resorted to, although Mr. Lincoln's party failed to elect a majority in either 
House of Congress. 

Another remedy conceded to be within the Constitution is retaliation. I mean 



* The dispute between Vermont and New York, wliicli began in 17G0, and continued 
until 1790, is an instructive passage in our political history, illustrating the relations of 
the colonies to each other and to the Confederation. The independence of Vermont was 
not recognized by Congress until slie had successfully asserted and vindicated it against 
Great Britain, New York, and even Congress itself. It is difiicult to say whether one most 
admires the address of Jier diplomatists, the courage of her military leaders, or the sturdy 
virtue of the "Green Mountain Boys;" but certain it is, that between her intrigues with 
the British and her negotiations with Congress, her alliance with Massachusetts and her 
mortal antagonism witli New York, Vermont, after a long and eventful struggle, baiHed 
all her adversaries, established her independence as a sovereign State, and was duly ad- 
mitted into the Union upon an equal footing with New York, her old enemy, but evermore, 
I trust, her good friend. (See LippincotCs Cabinet Histories, Vermont, chaps. 3, 12, and 
14, for tlie narrative of this controversy.) 



retaliatory legislation as betweeu tin- Suites; restrictions upon commerce au 
trade and intercourse. Mr. Stephens, of Geor^'ia, atiJ other southern statesniei 
have devised and su^'gested such measures, the conHtitutinnalitj of which is n»aii 
tained hy the ai>lest jurists. A third remedy would have been the-withdraw; 
of all the .southern Kepresentatives in both branches of Con^'rew. To illustrai 
the effect of it: suppose the election of a President and Vico-I'resident, ha 
devolved upon one or other of tlie two Houses of CongrcHs. and the Uepresen 
atives of a sutheient number of States, to prevent the formation of a constitution! 
quorum, had withdrawn : that would have rendered the constitutional election of 
President impossible, and the eo»se(|ueuccs to the (Government of a failure I 
choose an Kxecutive, in the manner re(|uired by the Constitution, I need notstc 
to elaborate. 

A fourth alternative, so far as the territorial «|ue>iinri is cMiKfriied, would hav 
been for the southern States to occupy, by immiLrration, such portions of the con 
niou tirritory as they desired, and pn.tect their slave property in the territory b 
such force as might be neces.sary to repel interference. IJy the law of the Ian- 
they would undoubtedly have had a right to defend their property by any amoui 
of force necessary to overcome any species of attack. This remedy would hav 
been what is (ailed " fighting within tlie Ininn." I say, therefore, sir, in get 
eral terms, without amplifying the.-^e illustrations, that the remedy of secessio 
chosen by the aggrieved St^ites, was perhaps the leiLst effectual as a mode of con 
straint upon the (Government. It will remain to be considered, Mr. Chairman 
how fir the plan of peaieable seec.-sion has been consistently carried out. 1 
will remain to be seen whether or no, the precipitate action of South Carolina am 
other southern States and communities has not essentially chan:;cd tl'o ori-rina 
character of the secession movement. It will remain to be shown whether or d< 
by their interference with the fort.s, arsenals, navy-yards, and the commoi 
property of the Confederacy, they have not committed a faUil error in the devel 
opment of their own policy, thcm.sclves initiating that resort to foree and " coci 
cion " which they have so wisely, and, as I think, so justly deprecated. 

Before proceeding to that branch of the subject, I will allude, cursorily, to th 
policy proposed by the dominant party in the northern States, in the present con 
dition of affairs. With remarkable unanimity they insist upon the emplovmen 
of armies and fleets to compel the allegiance of unwilling States. If this polic 
were just, it is impo.ssible. To what end shall we make war upon a member o 
the Union ? It could not be expected that the most successful prosecution o 
hostilities would end in reconciliation. Shall we seek to subjugate the South 



and, obliteratiiio- the States, hold it as a mere province, by conquest 'i This would 
be repugnant to the theory of our (Jovcrnment, which has for its basis, States and 
citizens, not dependencies or subjects. If the purpose of such a war be to 
destroy the power of the antagonistic States, as foreign enemies, let me implore 
you to wait for sufficient evidence of their hostility, and to be sure that you have 
exhausted all the means of conciliation. But I utterly deny that the extremest 
Federalist, at the time of the formation of the Constitution, ever tolerated the 
idea that the Federal Government, through any of its instrumentalities, could 
constrain the political action of any sovereign State, except by means of the judi- 
cial power of the Supreme Court. It will be sufficient, to make this statement 
indisputable, to refer gentlemen to the exposition of the Constitution by Alexan- 
der Hamilton. The founder and leader of the Federal party developed in the 
Federalist, cotemporaneously with the adoption of the Constitution, the most 
powerful argument that could be framed against the power or the utility of 
employing coercion through the Federal Government upon a sovereign State. 
He convinced our public men of that epoch, that this element in the Articles 
of Confederation, made the Government of the Confederation impracticable. 
He established, by numerous examples from ancient and modern history,* that 
whenever the controversies between associated States had resulted in an appeal 
to force, civil war and foreign intervention hastened the destruction of the 
Confederation. 

Sir, we all know that the Amphyctionic league, one of the most perfect of the 
Republics that existed among the Grecian Commonwealths, was destroyed by an 
attempt to employ coercion upon one of its members. The people of the resisting 
State— the Phocians— sought the alliance of Philip of Macedon. Eeady and 
eager to give it, he occupied the territory of the Republic with his armies, and 
settled the quarrel by annexing the principal States to Macedcn. The Achajan 
Confederacy, the last and best hope of ancient liberty, was destroyed by the in- 
tervention of Home, on the appeal of one of the confederated States, which sought 
this mode of escaping the coercion of the league. The passions of men are Ihe 



To those who are disposed to follow this branch of the discussion, nnd especially to the 
Republicans who meditate the subjugation of the seceding States, I commend the essays 
from Nos. lo to 20 of the Federalist, both inclusive. In denying this power to the Federal 
Government, M..l,«on and Hamilton fully concurred. They represented, in this opinion, 
bo h of the grear parties and all the leading public men of their tin.e, in this country. Who 
will look further for authoritative exposition of the principles and faculties of our Govern- 
meut i 



same in all time. We have, at this cpnch, a I'hilip of Miicpdon in Louis Napn- 
Icon uf France, with armies such as the worhl has never before seen, eager for 
employment ; with a Navy which would enable him to transfer these arras to our 
shores, sooner than iMiilip of MaccJon could liave niarche<l to Athens. "Who can 
fail to see that an attempt to subjngate the States of the South by the Federal 
Government would result in appeals for aid, for protection, for alliances, for com- 
mercial treaties, in any quarter where aid and succor could be found ? The 
armies of Louis Napoleon and of Victoria, instead of the Conprcss of the United 
States, would be made the arbiters of the issues arising out of the existing revo- 
lution. The confederated Governments of modern tinirs equally illustrate the 
same views. The more familiar instances e found in the hi.'.tory of the Ger- 
manic Confederation, the I'nitcd N'" tl-, .iinl tlw Confederacy of Poland. 
No in.stance more apposite can be\ an that tarnished by our own struggle 
for indopendcnee, which was not accv i.shed without the intervention of France. 

Having adverted, sir, to the snuthe. i remedy, and also to the policy of the 
dominant party in the northern State.><, I will allude to the advice of the conser- 
vative portion of the northern States. We recommend the recognition of all the 
rights of the South, without fjualification ; the recognition of the e<jualify of the 
States; and non-interference with the institution of slavery wherever it exists, or 
where it may be ef^tablislied with the consent of the people, in any of the new 
States to be formed out of the common territory belonging to the Union. This 
is the remedy of justice and conciliation. 

I'ermit ine, before I leave this general view of our situation, to advert to a 
phrase which expresses, somewhat vaguely perhaps, a popular estimate of the 
duty of the (Jovernment at this time. Everybody at i\u- North cal's for the 
"enforcement of the laws." That would be, indeed, desirable. It is not less 
the duty, perhaps, than a necessity of Government, because, without the enforce- 
ment of tile laws, Government cannot be said to exist. Hut, ."ir, this suggestion 
does not meet the existing state of things, because by the Constitution we can 
only enforce our laws on persons, and by means of the magistr:icy. There arc 
no laws that we can enforce against a Stato, in art .s. To bring individuals 
within the reirular jurisdiction of law, we must have court,s and juries; 
and the Constitution expressly declares that we must deal with offenders in 
the State where the crime is committed. You must have a grand jury there to 
find indictments ; which you know you have not. You must have your courts 
there, before which you will arraign offenders ; and you have no courts. You 
must empanel a jury of citizens of the State where the oSeuae was committed ; 



and that you cannot do ; and if you could, if you had g^l this machinery, where 
would you find in South Carolina, or Georgia, or Louisiana, or any of the insur- 
gent States, a jury that would bring in a verdict of guilty on an indictment for a 
political oflFence, arising out of the present political troubles ? 

Let us now return to the course of events at the South — for it is there our im- 
mediate danger is to be seen. Pending the consideration in Congress, of the 
various measures proposed to restore peace and to re-establish the Government, 
upon secure foundations of popular content, alarming events have recently oc- 
curred upon the soutber'n coast. We are threatened with immediate hostilities, 
while we are deliberating. Should a state of war intervene, as an incident of 
secession, provoked by the precipitate and unjustifiable action of the local author- 
ities in these States, all hope of any solution, other than such as the sword may 
provide, must be abandoned. It is not yet time to des-pair of some satisfactory 
basis of adjustment being agreed upon in this Congress; although little, if any, 
progress has yet been made in the work of reconciliation. It is, nevertheless, 
beyond question, too soon for South Carolina, Louisiana, and their allies, 
to assume to dictate to the United States the terms upon which the Confed- 
eracy is to be dismembered, and to seize upon the possessions of the Govern- 
ment which lie adjacent to their jurisdiction. The President has communicated 
to Congress the recommendations which he has thought it his duty to make. 
They are all that the South could reasonably ask or hope to secure. This House 
has ordered a committee of one from each State, to consider the suggestions of 
the President, together with propositions which have beeu presented to the House 
from the Representatives of many States. In another place, our colleagues in 
Congress are occupied assiduously with the consideration of the subject, and espe- 
cially the plan of compromise proposed by a distinguished southern Senator. The 
recent speech of another distinguished Senator, representing the Republican 
party, and also, as rumor says, called to the highest position in the councils of 
the nest Administration, authorizes us to expect, before many days, a proposition 
of honorable compromise from the Cabinet of Mr. Lincoln. Perhap.s all these 
hopes may be disappointed— all these labors unavailing. The grave, but welcome, 
duty of pacification may, after all, unavoidably go over to our successors. Possi- 
bly, if our patriotism has all become provincial, reconciliation is impossible. 

What, then, is to be done? What is the duty of this Administration and of 
this Congress ? If we must abandon all hope from our own exertions, let us, at 
least, hand over our trust intact, to the next Administration. If the next Ad- 
ministration, with a majority in both branches of Congress, fail, we must await 
an appeal to the people. The Republican party can save the Union now, by an 
honorable compromise, acceptable to the border States. If this be withheld, al- 
though the Union may be yet dismembered, the Confederacy will be reconstructed 
upon the ashes of the men who destroyed it. What is now to be done ? State 
after State wirhdraws its Representatives from this Congress, and will soon accredit 
them to the Congress of another confederation. Our wisest men fear that no 



9 

compromise can be perfected in this Congress. The dominant party in the Legis- 
latures of most of the eastern, northern, and western States have indicated by 
their action that they will not make the concessionB that are indiapcnsablc to 
reunion. What, then, 1 repeat, becomes the duty of this Congress and of this 
Administration y I say, for one, that 1 believe that duty to be to preserve the 
statits quo ; to maintain the Uuvernment ; and, as a paramount duty, neither to 
initiate nor to permit agirression. 

But it is an essential condition of this policy that the like purpose and the like 
spirit shall animate our southern friends. It will never do, f-ir, for them to protest 
against coercion, and, at the same moment, seize all the arms and arsenals and 
forts and navy-yards and &hips tiiat may, through our forbearance, fall within 
their power. This is not peaceful secession. These acts, whensoever or l)y 
whomsoever done, are overt nets of war. And, sir, when sovereign States, 
by their own deliberate acts, make war, they must not cry peace. When they 
employ force, they cannot declaim against coercion. Tlie jurLndiction of the 
Federal Government in the State of South Carolina is one thing; the right of 
the Federal Government to juri.sdiction and absolute control over its forts and 
arsenals and ships-of-war and navy-yards is (|iiitc a dilTerent f|uestion. How- 
ever secession may, as a political remedy, extend to the territory of S(»uth Carolina, 
or of Georgia, ur of Virginia, it does not apply to territory which, by their own 
sovereign acts, they have indefcasibly ceded to the Government of the United 
States. The repeal of the ordinance by which a Slate adopted the Constitution, 
cannot undo an absolute cession of territory; all the territory thus acquired, with 
the consent of the respective States, was purcha.scd for a fair equivalent. The 
sovereign authority of the Government of the I'nited States, overall its territorial 
po.ssessions within the State*, rests upon the unconditional and voluntary grant ol' 
exclusive jurisdiction by the States in whitli it was previously vested; these States, 
each for itself, had the sovereign right to -urrender this jurisdiction, or to reserve 
it. Territory once ceded to us, by the act of the Slate, is relinquished f)revor, 
and can only be regained with the consent of the Government of the United 
States. 

I am arguing this (|Ucstion, .^lr. Chairman, on tin- promi.-cs a.-^Humed by the 
seceding States, and which they affirm to bo indisputable. They were always 
sovereign. The Constitution recognizes their sovereign right to grant, or refuse 
to grant, to the United States, exclusive juri.sdiction over these fortified places. 
They have made the grant ab.solutely and without cond tion. Now, sir, when a 
sovereign State, by its own act, wh.-thcr by. law, or by treaty, or by grant, cedes 
unalterably a piece of territory, whether large or small, whether for a fortress, or 
an arsenal, or a city, it is irrevocable, except with the consent of both parties — 
the State and the Federal Government No matter what changes a State may 
have the right to make in its political condition, those can never rotroact upon or 
annul a cession of property, jurisdiction, or territorial control, made to another 
sovereign State. 



10 

Now, there is the case, stated with whatever accuracy I can command, with 
regard to the forts, arsenals, navy-3-ards, and public buildings, belonging to the 
Government of the United States, which we hold in the States. Let it be said, if 
you please, that the Government is only a trustee. It is the trustee for thirty- 
three States, not for one; and no one of the States can seize the common property 
of all, divest the trustee of control, aud oust all the other associates of right, power, 
and possession. Such a proposition is subversive of all the law of nations ; it is 
monstrous in jurisprudence, in morals, and in politics. It is utterly untenable 
and indefensible. I trust that this question will not be misunderstood by the 
southern States. I hope they will not percipitate upon the General Government 
the issue of war in defence of its incontestable right, and in the discharge of an 
undoubted duty to hold each and every one of these fortified places, provided for 
the common defence of this country. And, sir, it is there, and there alone, that, 
at this time, the danger of a collision lies; it is upon this issue that, if civil war is 
begun, the first battle will be fought. 

Sir, it would be difficult to imagine graver errors than have been committed in 
the rash seizure of these fortifications, and the appropriation of the public prop- 
erty. Remember that these attacks and these seizures have been made notwith- 
standing the solenm declaration by the President of the United States that he did 
not possess the right to employ, and should not attempt to use, coercion upon a 
sovereign State. No State has been assailed or menaced ; no ship-of-war threatened 
any of their harbors; no military force was sent within their borders; and there- 
fore it cannot be said that these seizures were made to secure the means of protection 
against invasion. Kemember the course of events. South Carolina called a conven- 
tion for the purpose of taking steps to secede from the Union. No interference from 
any (luartcr hindered that measure. There was no interference from the Executive 
or from Congress. The convention was held and the ordinance of secession 
passed. No interference yet — none whatever. No naval force, or military force 
was sent for any purpose of coercion. South Carolina organized and equipped 
an army. There was yet no legislative or Executive interference on the part 
of the General Government. The act of secession from its inception to its com- 
pletion was rendered as perfect as human agency could make it, and no coercion 
was attempted by the executive or legislative departments of the Government. 
Therefore, in no sense was South Carolina menaced. 

What next ? South Carolina sent three commissioners here to treat for the 
ac(juisition of the forts in the harbor of Charleston, and the public establish- 
ments belonging to the United States, within its boundaries. Pending negotia- 
tions, all the unprotected forts, the arsenal, and the public buildings, were taken 
and occupied by the authorities of South Carolina. If they belonged to her, 
why did she come here to negotiate for them? If they did not belong to her, 
to take them was an act of spoliation — an act of war. The commissioners, who 



11 

had evidently studied diplomacy in the sehool of Sir Lucius ()"rrij.rjrer,* lost their 
temper, and terminated their nei^otiution su<ldeiily in a secon<l u»»tc, which was 
returned to them hy the President, as impirtinent. The transfer of sixty men 
from one possession of the United States to another, as a me:wure of security for 
themselves agaiust the threats of u State in arms, seems to have been sufficient 
to arouse the apprehensions not only of South O:irolina, hut of all the adjacent 
States. The mere ehaiiLre of position of a handful of men, menaced with attack 
from an army, was assumed to be a declaration of war by the Federal (Jovcrnmcnt. 

What next i* The forces of South Carolina assault au<l t;ike Castle Pinckney 
and Fort Moultrie. With all the pomp ami eireumstanee of war, the battalions 
of South Carolina, duly provided with .scaling' ladders, battle-axes, and pontoons, 
march in j,'rim array to the assault of these fortifications — the clear and india- 
putable property au«l domain of the I'nited StJites. Defended, (tr rather occu- 
pied, only by an omnibus load of laborers, the capture does not prove as diificult 
in execution as it was reckless in conception. The palmetto flai; is inau;,'urated 
with blank cartridj^es, and the stars and stripes arc transferred to Fort Sumter — 
a stroni,' place defended by a noble soldier — where mither the flair nor its defend- 
ers have been disturbed. lOven yet, the President and Couf^ress forbear toj-csort 
to measures cither of retaliation or of punishment, or even to recover passession 
of the stronirholds upon which an inexcusable trespa.ss has been committed. 

What next? The fortifications in the vicinity of (leorgia, Louisiana, and 
Florida, are seized and held by the militia of those States, actinj;, it is under- 
stood, by the authority of the Governors ol" those States, alth(mi:h withtmt the 



* "Sir Lueitu. Oh, faith! I'm in the lack of iL I never could have fotind him in a 
sweeter temper for my purpose — to be sure, I'm just come in the nick! Now to enter into 
conversation with him, ami to quarrel nenteelly. \^liors up (•, Captain .Viisoi.itk.] With 
regirJ to that mutter. Captain, I must heg le:ivc t.) .liffor in opinion with you. 

CiipC. Ahsolnlf. I'pon my wonl, then, you musi be a very .subtle disputant : becn.'se, 
sir, I happened just then to be giving no opinion iii all. 

Sir Luriux. That's no roaion. For give mo leuve to tell you, a man may think an un- 
truth, aa well as speak one. 

Capt. Ahx. Very true, sir; but if a min never utters his thoughts, I should think they 
might stand a chanoo of escaping controversy. 

Sir Luciiit. Then, sir, you differ in opinion with me; which amounts to the same thing. 

Capt. Abs. Hark'ce, Sir Lucius, if I had not b.-fore known you to be a gentleman, upon 
my soul, I should not have discovered it at this interview : for w lat you can drive at, 
unless you moan to quarrel with me. I cannot conceive I 

Sir Lucius. 1 humbly thank you. sir. for the quickness of your apprehension, [/ioirrny.] 
You have named the very thing I would be at. 

Ciipt Ah.-,. Very well, sir; 1 shall certainly not balk your inclination. Rut I should be 
glad you would please to explain your motives. 

Sir Ludus. Pray. sir. be easy; the qu"»rrcl is a very pretty quarrel, as it stands; we 
should only spoil it by trying to expl.ain it. * » • So, no more ; but name your time 
aud place." — The Rirals, act iv, ti-inf m. 



12 

sauction of the people, expressed either ia Legislatures or conventions. These 
places are held by force, in contempt of the authority of the United States. 
These are seditious proceedings ; they are insurrections against the Govern- 
ment, differing only from the lawless disturbances of the pubHc peace by a mob, 
in this : that they are of greater enormity, because perpetrated by men clothed 
with color of authority, and holding responsible and respectable public stations. 
And these offences against law and order, and the public peace and safety, are 
suffered to pass by a lenient Government without punishment. The events of 
the following week proved that forbearance was misconstrued into timidity, and 
the indulgence extended to infatuation was made the shield to cover outrage with 
impunity. 

What next? An unarmed vessel of commerce, chartered by the Government 
as a transport ship, appears in the waters of Charleston, bearing despatches, pro- 
visions, and men to a place within the unquestionable jurisdiction of the Federal 
Government of the United States. The American flag is flying at the masthead 
of the Star of the West, and as she approaches the harbor, while in sight of the 
fortifications belonging to this Government, the official character of the ship 
being.well known, the authorities of South Carolina, through their military forces, 
opened a fire upon that defenceless ship, and compelled her to retire and abandon 
the peaceful and legitimate mission in which she was engaged. Now, sir, that 
was an act of war, unqualified war. Had such an offence been perpetrated by 
any foreign Power, it would have roused every man in this nation ; it would 
have elicited from every patriot in this House a loud and earnest protest, and an 
appeal for all the measures necessary to repel the insult and avenge the wrong. 

It was, sir, I repeat, an act of naked, unmitigated war. Happily — thanks ! 
eternal thanks ! to the moderation and the noble magnanimity of Major Ander- 
son — it was not so treated by him. He remembered that it was done by his 
fellow-countrymen; that it was done by men excited and misled by their passions, 
and their own anomalous political condition. He paused, with cannon in position 
and the torch lighted. He referred the transaction to his Government. Had 
he employed the discretion vested in every commander of a fortress, when he 
saw a ship, with his own flag floating over it, with defenceless men upon its 
deck, fired upon without excuse or provocation, he would have been justified in 
punishing this insult by laying Charleston in ashes; and had he done so, civiliza- 
tion would have approved the act. No man, looking at the duty of Major Ander- 
son, and looking at the responsiljility and obligation of his position, could have 
censured the most signal vindication of the honor of the flag which his sword and 
his life were pledged to maintain. It is another proof of the forbearance, not only 
of the Government, but of the people, that the magnanimity of this gallant soldier, 
is universally commended, and is known to be sanctioned without reserve by the 
Administration. Yet the attack upon that ship was none the less an offence; it was 
none the less an act of war; it was none the less the initiation of a policy which, if 
persisted in, must inevitably bring on the conflict which we all so much deprecate. 



18 

It must ivsult ill til.' i-iii|.lnyi,„-nt nf force to protect the rijilits aii«I the jiropcrty 
and the honor of this country; ami it uiiist forever make iujpossilile that recogni- 
tion of a coumion destiny in a reunited ('mrederacy, whicli. from one end of tlie 
land to the other, seems the only possilile hope h-ft to the patriot, in the 
existing; exigency. Sir, you couhl not — I have said it hefore. and 1 repeat 
it now — you couM not recruit a regiment that wrndd ever march from the 
frontier of New York into any soutliern Slate for the purjiose of einphiying co- 
ercion upon its people in the exercise of their legitimate political rights. Never, 
never 1 But the men of New York would go in untold thousands anywhere to 
protect the flag of their country, and to maintain its legitimate authority. 

Here, tli.-n. 1 a^k ynm- attention once more to the great and cardinal distinc- 
tion hetween the employment of f »rce u|)on a sovereign State to compel the 
abandonment of proper measures within its legitimate jurisdiction to obtain a re- 
dress of grievances, or to secure independence; and the employment of force in 
defence of the indisputable right and jurisdiction of the United States, where 
that jurisdiction has been established irrevocably by the act of the seceding 
State itself ^Vhen the Constitution was formed, it was proposed to allow the 
General Government, without restricti<»n. to ae<|uire i)roperty in the States for 
the erection of fortifications, and the establishment of arsenals, navy-yanls. up 
for any other military purpose. In the debates on that article, it was insisted 
that the power was too l)road. and that it was necessary it should be limited by 
the insertion of a clause making the con.sent of the several States indispensible 
to the exercise of the power. Such a (|ualificatif»n was inserted, I think, upon 
the motion of Mr. (Jerry. In that form it was adopted unanimously, by the vote 
of every State in the C'onfederacy. Accordingly, sir, the States where these 
works of defence are located, have, in pui-suance of that clause in the Tonstitu- 
tion, given their consent to the purchase of the property ; and have ceded for 
ever, by their own sovereign will, exclusive jurisdiction to the Federal (n vern- 
ment over all these fortified places. 

It is well understood that the military plan of tlefenees in this country ha.s not 
been considered with reference only to the protection of the locality where the 
work may be jilaccd. but it is a great national system of defence, in which all 
these fortified places bear an important relation, not only to local security, but to 
the commort defence of the nation. Virginia or New York, have an e(|ual in- 
terest in Fort I'ickens. which protects our .'squadron and c inmerce in the (Julf of 
Mexico, or in Fortress Monroe, which protects the Capit4d where we are legislat- 
ing; or in Fort Sumter, which is an ei|ually important strategic position. New 
Y''ork has interests no less than South Carolina, or Georgia, or Fhirida. in each 
and all of these defences, and in the Jiavy-yard an<I forts at Fen.sacola, which 
have also been seized. The commercial interests of the North would be in.secure if 
their vast shipping in the Gulf trade had no protection from a s^juadron, which 
would find support and a basis of operations at I'ensacola. It is as es.sential to us 
as Gibraltar is to the British fleet in the Mediterranean. 



14 
The CHAIRMAN. The ocntlcuKiii's hour lias oxpived. 

Several Membeks. We want to hear the conclusion of the gentleman's 
argument ; and therefore move that his time be extended. 

An extension of time was unanimously granted. 

Mr. SICKLES. I thank the House. 

To resume. I am strongly impressed, Mr Chairman, with the correctness of 
the views I have presented, when I recur to the very eloquent and cogent argu- 
ment of the gentleman from Virginia, [Mr. Garnett.] In his observations 
yesterday on the subject of blockades, he adverted to the possibility that the Fed- 
eral Government might blockade one or uiore of the southern ports, as a restrictive 
measure, and one of a series of coercive proceedings; and he admonished us, if 
such an attempt were made, that England and France, unable to do without south- 
ern cotton, would interfere and compel us to open the southern ports. I main- 
tain that the argument which the gentleman addressed against blockades is the 
most unanswerable reason which human wisdom could frame against the surren- 
der of our forts. If it be possible for the contingency to happen, that the navies 
of France and England are to be brought to our shores to interfere with the asser- 
tion of our jurisdiction, would it not be worse than madness for us to surrender the 
fortified places, which alone would enable us to assert and maintain our indepen- 
dence ? Whatever may be our views upon the right of peaceable secession, what- 
ever we may anticipate as the future of this exigency, we yet have our political 
position to maintain as a great commercial nation. The commercial element of 
this country is in the North and West, and not in the South. The South must 
always be essentially an agricultural community, and can never be a military, 
naval, or commercial I'ower. 

We also have our paramount duty of self-defence to perform ; and these posts, 
these fortified places and navy-yards, are indispensable for the protection of our 
political position against the eventualities which secession will bring with it. These 
fortified jilaces are of a thousand times more importance with secession an accom- 
plished and irreversible fact, than if it had never been contemplated. There is no 
probability of foreign intervention without secession. With the establishment 
of a southern confederacy it is, perhaps, unavoidable. These considera- 
tions prove it to be our iujperative duty to hold these places, under all circum- 
stances. This necessity should admonish the southern population, which I believe 
sincerely desire to prevent war, that they can never be permitted to hold possessions 
which are necessary to maintain the integrity of this continent against foreign 
intervention or control. 

(Jur own statute-books arc full of precedents to justify us in asserting more than 
the right to hold these Ibrtified places. In 1811-12, Congress, by the votes of 
large majorities, in which southern men united, determined to take possession of 
the country west of the Mississippi, and also of the Floridas. And this was be- 
cause their occupation was esssential to our political safety — to our teri'itorial pro- 



ir, 

tfctinii. Tlic stati'siiiL'ii of till- Soutli are rniniuittiil to tin- rt'cniriiitiun of the rijriif 
and duty ol" tliis (iovermiioiit to hold any jiart nf tlu-ir ti-rritory. as a matter (if 
protective policy. Our own history is full of precedents for it. The liistory of 
every free and trreat people furnishes precedents for similar nu'asures of .security. 
The absolute rii;lits of the n.itinii coincide witli its neces.sary and olivious policy. 
Our duty is, then, plain and unalfi-ralile. We must maintain all our ritrlits. No 
forei}.'!! Power can he permitted to intervene between the seceiliiiLr States and this 
Government, nor to exerci.se any protectorate over them, or to hold any of our 
forts, or to occupy any portion of the territory hitherto within our limits. 

The interest.s of civilization, the obli^ratious of international law. and the pro.s- 
pcrity of European trade and commerce, forbid the hostile intervention of any 
European I'ower in a controversy between the (Jeneral (Jovernment and the .soiith- 
ern States. Yet it is a fact, of which we mu.st nut he uiimimlful. that tlie (lov- 
eriiments of Europe are in the hands of aristocracies, jealous of our pro<;ress. and 
fearful of the influence of our succe.><s upon their own political system. 'I'he Calu- 
nets of France and KuLrlaiid would be inclined to .seek any oj>portunity whiidi mitrht 
be lej^itimafely afforded to them, to jironiote the flismendierment of our ronfe<l- 
eracy. hiu-d i'almerston, in his well-known antipathy to this country, only 
represents the real sentiments of the uovnninir cl.i<«; in EiiL'land. The intimate 
relations which, in earlier times, existed between France and America, are traditions 
which Louis Najioleon has taken no pains to remember or preserve. Tliat one 
or the other would desife to form an alli.ince with a southern confederacy, is 
beyond a doubt. Tt mi<;ht be ditiicult to unite both of these Powers in such a 
scheme of policy. And it would rem.iin for tmr diplomatists to avail themselves 
of the jealousy which exists between Eiiirland and I-' ranee, to detach one or the 
other from a hostile conjbination against us; and thus cjuploy the power of one to 
prevent the intervention of either. 

And here let me enter my protest, as an .\mcric.in. airainst the inference which 
so many will be prompt to accept from the possible ilismembermcnt of the Con- 
federacy, that republican institutions have fiilc<l. It is not so. When such an 
event shall happen, it will prove only tliat our Fnion i>f States embraced an anta- 
gonistical element which could not co-exist with a purely republie.in theory of 
labor. This element, sit far from orifjinating with the l{e|iublie. was inherited 
from Spain and France and England, and by them ingrafted upon our primitive 
social, and jmlitical organization. The present controversy has not ari.sen out of 
any defect in our form of (lovernment, nor docs it furnish the least proof that 
the institutions which h.ive contributed so much to our signal advancement in 
civilization and power, nrv not ei|ually adapted to promote the same results in one, 
two, or three independent confederacies, embracing a honiogeneoas population 
and congenial interests. If anything were needed to show that the di.saffection in 
the southern States finds no origin in a di.ntrust of the adaptation of the free 
institutions to their peculiar condition, it is to be seen in the fact that none of 
them propose to make any radical change in their State constitutions or laws ; 



16 

and with common accord, they all suprgest the existing Constitution of t"he United 
States as the basis of the contemplated southern confedel'ation. It is not difficult, 
I acknowledge, to foresee the ultimate changes which probable events might 
render \inavoidable in the institutions of a southern confederacy composed ex- 
clusively of slaveholding States. The necessity of large standing armies, the 
exigencies of defence and internal security, would hasten its tendencies towai'ds 
consolidation; the independence of the States would be merged; universal suffrage 
would soon be abandoned ; and the Government would, in the end, yield to the con- 
trol of an aristocracy, partly military, but mainly directed by the small class in 
whom would be united the possession of all the capital and all the labor. "What- 
ever may be the issue of existing complications, the Republic of the United 
States is imperishable. It will survive all the dangers which now assail it. It 
will vindicate the faith in humanity upon which it reposes. It will fulfill its 
destiny in the development of an ameliorated system of institutions and laws, 
which recognize the equality of all the citizens composing the Commonwealth. 

It is my prayer to our Father, that these disastrous events may go no further; 
that the day-spring from on high may visit us, and guide our feet into the way 
of peace. But whatever may be the issue of events — whether, happily, by con- 
ciliation and justice to the South, we may find an honorable and fraternal solution 
of our difficulties, or whether, unhappily, we blindly drift into alienation, war, 
and irrevocable separation — the great commercial interests of this country 
require, the destiny of American civilization demands, that the political and 
territorial control of this continent, from the mouth of the Hudson to the 
mouth of the Mississippi, fi'om the Atlantic to the Pacific seas, shall remain 
where it now is — in the hands of the Grovernment of the United States. In 
all the partisan issues between the South and the Republican party, the people 
of the ci^y of New York are with the South; but when the South makes an 
untenable issue with our country, when the flag of the Union is insulted, 
when the fortified places provided for the common defence are assaulted and 
seized, when the South abandons its northern friends for English and French 
alliances, then the loyal and patriotic population of that imperial city are 
unanimous for the Union. 



MoQiLL & WiTHEROW, Printers, Washington, D. 0. 



LlBRftR^ ^l, 



CONGRESS 



■S%95 72*6 _ 




